Packers Post-Mortem: Plenty of Blame to Go Around

Yes, we know. The Packers lost.

It was glorious, assuming you're not a fan of the Packers. And I don't blame you one bit for thinking it was glorious. Packer fans can be an insufferable bunch, especially when their favorite team looks like it's going to repeat.

The team isn't going to repeat now. A virtual no-show against the New York Giants Sunday made that a certainty.

(GIVE CREDIT TO THE OPPONENT. I don't think I should have to. The Giants played well, but the Packers coughed the ball up more in one game than virtually the entire season, Aaron Rodgers was as sharp as a pillowcase, and the Giants turned the game's momentum on a Hail Mary pass before halftime that never should have happened in the first place. Green Bay would have lost to Miami on Sunday, they played so badly.)

It just wasn't Green Bay's day. As I saw someone point out, the Giants' star players all played well. Osi Umenyiora had a huge strip-sack in the third quarter. The secondary locked up the Packers' receivers all night. Rodgers was harassed and appeared to alternate between being skittish to throw downfield and holding on to the ball entirely too long, allowing sacks and hits he never should have taken. The running backs -- Ahmad Bradshaw and Brandon Jacobs -- made some big plays.

Conversely, Rodgers was off all night. Receivers were dropping passes. Ryan Grant looked terrible. The offensive line -- namely left tackle Chad Clifton -- struggled. Defensive stars Clay Matthews and Charles Woodson were only known to be on the field because you could see them chasing after Giants running down the field.

Mike McCarthy didn't have his best day, foolishly calling a timeout to help set up the Hail Mary pass, going for it on a fourth down in the fourth quarter when the Pack was only down a score, and calling for an onside kick with five minutes left in a ten-point game, while the Packers had all three timeouts. His aggression has benefited more often than not, and this was a case where it probably did not. That doesn't change the fact that I'd much rather have an aggressive coach who takes chances than a passive one who sees fourth down and sends on the kicking team almost every time, regardless. Mistakes of aggression are always easier for me to stomach than the opposite.

These things happen. Teams aren't always going to be at their best, and that's part of why it's so freaking hard to win championships. You have to get your team to play consistently enough to get in the playoffs, then your reward for a high seed is the challenge of keeping rhythm and cohesiveness going through a long layoff.

Regular readers and listeners know I hate when coaches pull back in Week 17 and rest guys when they know a bye week is coming. I think it's a huge mistake to take them out of their routine right before the important games. McCarthy did it this year, taking guys like Rodgers, Matthews, and Woodson out of the lineup for the game against Detroit.

It might have seemed like a good idea, because Matthews and Woodson were dinged, and Rodgers was working behind a patchwork offensive line.

It blew up in the Packers' faces, because none of the players who sat in Week 17 played well. It's not that anyone else really did, but these three were the ringleaders all year long. When they're off, it's going to be tough on anyone else to get going.

There's plenty of blame to go around. It's not on one individual, or one unit. Lots of guys screwed up, and most of the team failed to play to its potential.

It's sad for Packers fans, but it's hard to complain about a team that won 21 of 22 before the Giants game, and a team that hoisted the Lombardi Trophy not even 365 days ago.

Hopefully, it isn't 15 years before the team gets back, because the 1997 team failed to repeat, and we all thought the window of opportunity was still wide open before Randy Moss showed up in the NFC Central.

Super Bowl XLV Prediction

I promised myself I wouldn't spend endless hours anticipating this game Sunday, and I have not done that. Instead, I've been trying to avoid the hype, avoid all the lame reporting about the classless Packers team photo or the drunken Steelers quarterback.

The Super Bowl is upon us, and once we get through this weekend series against the Gophers, nothing will be standing in the way.

Sunday's game pits two teams that are similar in many ways. Both have dynamic young quarterbacks. Both have explosive 3-4 defenses with elite defensive backs.

For what it's worth, even the freaking fans are similar. There probably isn't a fanbase in the NFL with a better reputation for loyalty and energy than the Steelers and Packers. This isn't like the Steelers playing the Cowboys, or the Packers taking on a team like the Patriots, where the fans have some reason to dislike the opponent.

To be perfectly frank, Packer fans and Steeler fans should generally get along better than any fans in the NFL. They've got a lot in common, and no serious reason to dislike one another.

On the field, the similarity in defensive schemes makes it very interesting. Will Dick LeBeau and Dom Capers find a way to slow down the offenses? Or will the offenses be able to adjust and move the ball because they're so familiar with what they're seeing?

Typically, when these defenses are successful in big games, it's because the coordinators have come up with something the opponent hasn't seen. A personnel package, blitz, coverage, or look of some sort that's out of the blue. B.J. Raji's game-winning touchdown in the NFC Championship came on a play the Packers rarely run. If the offense doesn't know it's coming, the defense has a huge advantage ... especially if the offense thinks it's going to be something completely different.

Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers each have plenty of weapons at their disposal.

As I mentioned earlier this week, it makes me think this game will be decided by something or someone we haven't discussed as much.

It's not a hard rule, but it seems to happen every now and then.

Add in that these teams are closely-matched, and it becomes even easier to envision the game coming down to something like special teams or a defensive lineman making a play when we're talking all this time about linebackers, Charles Woodson, and Troy Polamalu.

I don't even know why I'm making a prediction. After all, I'm relatively certain that it's against the law to pick against your favorite team in a championship game. You follow them all year to this point, hanging on virtually every play, and you pick against them in the biggest game you'll play?

Stupid.

But it also makes this prediction pointless. You know what's coming.

As a fan, nothing beats having your team on the big stage playing for all the marbles. It can lead to a bit of sensory overload when you watch three hours of coverage over a plane safely landing somewhere, but it's worth it in the end.

The Green Bay Packers are in the Super Bowl, dadgummit.

And this time, they're going to win it.

Packers 23, Steelers 17

Yes, I'm taking the under. I just don't see LeBeau and Capers being outsmarted all night. I think they'll get the better of the play for most of the game. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if this game makes the over, it'll be at least in large part because of turnovers and possibly defensive points.

Catch me on the Steelers Lounge podcast here.

Ted Thompson May Not Want Spotlight, But He's Earned It Anyway

Ted Thompson has made one thing abundantly clear as general manager of the Green Bay Packers.

He wants nothing to do with the spotlight.

Some GMs don't mind the face time. They built the team, after all, and they like the idea of other people giving them credit for that.

Thompson isn't like that. Instead of inviting the spotlight, he does everything he can to avoid it. He doesn't give a lot of press conferences. He isn't running up and down the sideline like a crazy person at the end of games.

When the George Halas Trophy -- which was much nicer-looking before the NFL "modernized" the thing -- was handed out in the Packers' locker room Sunday, Thompson wasn't there to grab it, do an interview, or take the attention away from the people who earned it.

He might be largely responsible for many of the players who were in front of the camera Sunday, but he's still content to let them get the credit for what has happened in Green Bay.

Even if much of it should go to him.

"He's the leader of our football operations," head coach Mike McCarthy said Monday. "He's why this team is in the shape that it's in and why the future looks so bright."

Look at this list:

Nick Barnett
Morgan Burnett
Brandon Chillar
Jermichael Finley
Ryan Grant
Brad JonesDerrick Martin
Mike Neal
Brady Poppinga
Anthony Smith
Mark Tauscher

Those are all players who either could have or actually did start games for the Packers in 2010 before going on injured reserve. In the case of Martin and Smith, they were expected to be contributors more on special teams, but they were still contributors, and with how the injury bug hit this team, they were both on track to get significant time at safety.

This team was ravaged by injuries, and they lost key players.

So what did Thompson do?

Instead of panicking and making a big-splash trade -- which would have been completely contradictory to his personality and management style -- Thompson stuck to his guns. He tried to fill from within, and when he rant out of bodies, he started looking toward undrafted players.

Unwanted players.

He found guys like Frank Zombo, Sam Shields, James Starks, Howard Green, Erik Walden, Tim Masthay, and Robert Francois, either late in the 2010 draft, after the 2010 draft (in free agency), off the street during the 2010 season, or off waivers.

They've all become big parts of this team, with Shields becoming the nickel back the team was searching for when they realized Al Harris wouldn't be ready right away. Zombo might not be much of a run-stopper at linebacker, but he can rush the passer. Walden had two sacks during the Week 17 win over the Bears.

Green is a huge cog in the defensive line rotation.

I'm not sure there are the proper superlatives for what Masthay has done. Outside of honking that punt right to DeSean Jackson in the Wild Card Game, I'm not sure he's done anything remotely close to "bad" since about the first week of October. He's been outstanding, including with how his alternating pooch punts and freaking bombs were able to keep the Bears behind the eight-ball in terms of field position.

The mantra going into the week was "Don't kick to Devin Hester."

The Packers kicked to Devin Hester, and they covered the hell out of those kicks. Hester didn't come close to making a big play.

The job Thompson has done here is nothing short of remarkable. From a standpoint of fan perception -- admittedly not a big subject for Thompson -- he's probably earned a few accolades.

Hopefully, given the things many were saying about him after Favreapalooza 2008, he's earned a few apologies, too.

When asked about that decision Monday, McCarthy was as open as you could expect him to be.

"Well, I think that's the big part of our business," he said. "We have a plan. Unfortunately, for the media, we don't have … it’s probably not in the best interest for us to put every decision, every conversation out there in the public, and I understand how passionate our fan base is.

"So at that particular situation, there was a lot that was out in the public. But I think it truly shows the strength of Ted to stick to his guns, stay the course. We stayed with the plan. We made the decision based on what we felt was the best interests of the Green Bay Packers, and we never budged off of it. It wasn't popular, and it wasn't fun at times, but we felt it was the right decision. And I think why we're standing here today talking about it proves it was the right decision."

Like I said on Twitter Sunday, now that the Packers have gotten back to the Super Bowl, and Favre missed out after coming so close twice in three years, does that mean Thompson can finally be considered the winner of that trade?

After all, he was able to show who runs the Green Bay Packers, and he then spent the rest of his time quietly proving why he was the chosen one.

As Super Bowl XLV approaches, hopefully Packer fans don't forget how they got there. It wasn't easy, but Thompson devised his plan, stuck to it, and now the fans are going to reap the benefits.

Do the Dance, B.J.

Life is good, Packer fans.

Enjoy.

Packers Need to Sharpen Up to Beat Falcons

NFL Network is a grand thing. As if the "Top Ten" shows, follies shows, and other magnificent NFL Films productions weren't enough, the network has been re-airing regular-season games that are being revisited in the playoffs.

One of those is the Week 12 game between Green Bay and Atlanta. In re-watching that game, a few things stood out. For the Packers to pull the upset Saturday night at the Georgia Dome, many of those things will have to change.

(Note: I'm a Packer fan. Don't look here for intricate analysis of what the Falcons have to do to win, because I'm not giving you that. I don't want the Falcons to win.)

That game ended 20-17 in Atlanta's favor after Matt "Matty Ice" Ryan ably and bravely drove the Falcons about 20 yards into field goal range following a long kickoff return and a stupid facemask penalty on the Packers. The game was tied on an Aaron Rodgers dart to Jordy Nelson along the left sideline about six yards deep in the end zone. That fourth-down play was made by Rodgers, who had no one initially, and scrambled to his left to buy time. He then zipped a pass to Nelson and couldn't have thrown it any better.

However, the Packers were beaten by inconsistent execution in all phases, as they were in many of their five other losses this season.

They couldn't run the ball at all in this game, and it hurt them in goal-line and short-yardage situations. Eventually, coach Mike McCarthy just gave up on the run, and that left Rodgers to make plays with his feet and arm, sometimes when those types of plays weren't there to be made.

This makes James Starks a big player in Saturday's game. His ability to run against the Philly front seven Sunday made a huge difference in Green Bay's ability to win the game, even if he was held out of the end zone. It'll be even bigger Saturday, because Rodgers -- despite the nearly-complete lack of a running game -- was able to keep Green Bay in the Week 12 tilt. If he has more help, it greatly benefits McCarthy's play-calling acumen and the Packers offense in general.

Over the course of the season, receivers James Jones, Jordy Nelson, Donald Driver, and Greg Jennings were all guilty of critical drops. Jones' drop in Sunday's game -- a sure touchdown and a 21-3 halftime lead if he catches it -- probably made the difference between the Packers winning going away and having to hold on for dear life. Rodgers has missed a few big plays, and in general, this offense has left way too many points on the field for anyone's liking.

McCarthy gets too conservative at times, not giving his offense a chance to really clamp down and take control of a game. At the same time, his conservatism helped a great deal on Sunday. Between his insistence on calling run plays late and Dom Capers' ability to keep the Eagles from making a big play for a touchdown earlier in the fourth quarter, they held Philly at bay, and made it so the last drive didn't come with too much time on the clock. Instead, the Eagles had to burn their timeouts and run their hurry-up offense on the last series, which contributed to the game-clinching interception by Tramon Williams.

So there's good and bad there, but speaking generally, it would be nice if McCarthy would put his foot on the gas and go for the throat more often when the opponent is reeling. It would also be nice if players like Jones would execute when given the opportunity. That blame goes both ways, as you can see.

On defense, the tackling in Atlanta was as bad as it's been all season. So was the pass rush. Ryan was protected very well, and the quarterback missed only four times all afternoon. Smart money is on Capers finding a way to get heat on him, and if that doesn't work, they'll mix up coverages enough that Ryan will miss many more than just those four passes this week. Capers might not be long for Green Bay, but the Packers and their fans should consider themselves fortunate as long as he is around. Not many guys in the league know how to run a defense better than he does, and his game-planning has been nothing short of brilliant at times this year ... along with it being rarely subpar.

Michael Turner might not have the speed of a gazelle, but he will burn this defense if they don't get in the holes and make good hits on him. Atlanta won't give up on running the ball unless the score or game situation dictate it must, so expect a steady diet of Turner Saturday night.

Atlanta is a rock-solid team. They're not flashy in any area. The Falcons just make first downs, move the chains, get the occasional big play, and play very good defense. This team is easy to pick against because it doesn't have any overwhelming strengths, but at the same time, you're hard-pressed to find serious weaknesses.

That means it's a dangerous team to pick -- and play -- against. The Falcons won't beat themselves, and they're playing a team that has done just that more than once this season.

Green Bay is capable of executing at Atlanta's level, but there can be no letdown in that execution if the Packers are to move into the NFC Championship.

Packers Find a Way

Survive and advance.

Survive and advance.

This is the mantra when you get into tournament play, no matter the sport, no matter the level of competition.

It's especially true in the high-stakes world of NFL football, where the ability to move on in the playoffs can often be directly tied to a missed field goal or two, one underthrown pass, one foot out of bounds, one first down, or one sequence of bend-but-don't-break plays by a big-play defense.

For the Green Bay Packers, it took all of those things to overcome two fumbles, a critical drop of a perfect throw that could have put the game out of reach before halftime, and an offense that couldn't do much of anything after halftime.

It all added up to a 21-16 win in Philadelphia Sunday that:

• Kept the Packers' season alive.
• Showed they could win a close game away from Lambeau Field after losing so many (they had lost their last three road games by a total of 11 points, and their five total road losses were by a total of 17).
• They don't need Aaron Rodgers to throw for 400 yards to win.
• They can run the ball, after all.

Yes, there were hiccups. Rodgers' fumble in the third quarter was awful and preventable. James Jones would have been seeing that drop before halftime -- a sure touchdown -- in his sleep had the Packers lost. The Packers played a bit of prevent offense after halftime, especially once they got up 21-10.

But Dom Capers' defense came to play again, and while Tramon Williams' game-clinching interception was the only turnover they forced, they did a very good job containing Michael Vick. They were physical, stopped the run very well, and did a great job of stretching Philadelphia's only touchdown drive of the game.

(Their third-quarter touchdown came after Rodgers coughed it up at the Packers' 24. That's hardly a touchdown drive.)

The reward is another road game for a team still under .500 for the season away from Lambeau. They play No. 1 seed Atlanta on Saturday night. The short week and invigorating road win help.

So does the indoor venue. We still haven't seen definitive proof that Rodgers is a good cold-weather quarterback, and this is hardly the time to go asking for that. Instead, here's hoping the indoor venue is not of a serious advantage to the Falcons, who play in one of America's worst sports towns. It strikes as the kind of game where the Packers can take the crowd out of it by simply scoring first and making a defensive stop.

My long-standing motto has been to kick off to start a game whenever possible. I'm a big fan of letting the defense make a stop, and I like the idea of my team getting the ball to start the second half, because that's usually a more important time for momentum in the game.

Saturday might be an exception. Let Rodgers and Company on the field first. A six- or seven-minute touchdown drive could be the best possible way to start this road playoff game. Let "Matty Ice" stand on the sideline and watch as the Packers kill all their pregame momentum.

Then we'll see if Matt Ryan can live up to his stupid and largely unwarranted nickname.

NFL Goes World Cup

Sunday marks the final day of the NFL regular season. There are playoff spots, division titles, and conference No. 1 seeds all up for grabs as all 16 games will be played on Sunday. That's the only time this will happen during the season.

To set up the most compelling TV viewing, the NFL is taking a page out of the World Cup's playbook.

No, really. And to think, most of you probably think soccer is stupid. Apparently, the NFL is smart enough not to think that way.

Every four years, the World Cup is contested. The current format involves eight groups of four teams apiece playing a round robin, with the top two teams from each group advancing to the "knockout" stage. Game times are staggered over the first two games of the three-game round robin schedule, so no games are being played at the same time.

Once they get to the final round, though, each group's two-match slate is played at the same time. The reason behind this is that you will get an honest effort from all four teams. At least three of them are usually alive for the knockout phase, and sometimes all four are. By playing both matches simultaneously, no one has the advantage of knowing if they will be through to the knockout phase based on the other result in their group. If a team controls their own fate and needs a win to advance, they have to play to win, because they can't assume the other match will go their way.

Now, look at Sunday's NFL schedule.

Think now about the playoff scenarios that exist for Week 17.

The Steelers and Ravens are in the playoffs, but the AFC North hasn't been clinched. They play early games Sunday, and the Steelers can't sit on a Baltimore loss. They have to go all-out to beat Cleveland.

Atlanta hasn't won the NFC South yet, and must beat Carolina to clinch that and the NFC's No. 1 seed. No one thinks that will be a problem, but the Falcons don't get the luxury of resting their starters for that game. Tampa Bay is still in the hunt for a spot, but they need a win and help, and a loss to New Orleans won't clinch anything for anyone. Therefore, there's no harm to the Wild Card chase to have that as an early game.

The other playoff spots will be decided in late afternoon and night games. St. Louis and Seattle got the night game, and the winner is a division champion. Loser goes home.

In the late afternoon, you find Chicago-Green Bay, Dallas-Philadelphia, and the Giants at Washington. Those three games will decide the final NFC playoff spot, along with a first-round bye in the NFC. Having them go off at the same time ensures that no one will assume anything, and all six teams will give it their best effort, whether the goal is a playoff spot, a higher seed, or just to play spoiler.

In the AFC, the South Division will be decided in the late afternoon window, too. Jacksonville needs a win and an Indianapolis loss, while Indy can clinch the division if Jacksonville loses.

Give the NFL credit. They know how to create compelling television, and they've done that with their game-time tinkering for Sunday. They've also copied a successful formula from another sport.

It is a copycat society, after all.

NFL Coaches Angered By New Rule That Forces Them to Think

One of the common complaints about NFL football has nothing to do with the quality of the athletes taking part. Everyone agrees NFL players are the best in the business, elite athletes who are conditioned to newer heights seemingly every year. They are obviously at the top of their profession.

However, fans who prefer college football typically cite the cookie-cutter nature of NFL games. The similarity of schemes and philosophies comes up often, as does the relative conservatism of most coaches. It takes big-time grapefruits to make the decisions that drive NFL teams, but yet NFL coaches often seem frozen by the moment and incapable of thinking outside a three-by-seven box.

One of the exceptions to this rule seems to be New Orleans coach Sean Payton. He runs a pretty aggressive ship with the Saints, expecting his guys to be on top of every situation. His offense is not at all conservative, even at times when you could argue it is the right call. He gave defensive coordinator Gregg Williams free reign last year, and Williams used it to develop one of the best blitzing defenses in the league.

It's this swashbuckling, risk-taking reputation that makes many wonder exactly why Payton is so mad about the new overtime rules passed by NFL owners Tuesday. The rules, and the potential strategic decisions they could help lead to, seem right up Payton's alley.

But instead of embracing the new rules, Payton seems content to piss and moan about them, as noted by PFT king Mike Florio, who caught Payton's appearance with Peter King on Sirius NFL Radio.

Payton said he's "not a big fan" of the new rule, complaining that he's "gonna have to spend a half an hour explaining it to my wife or any fan."

For those who want to know the rule, here it is, straight from the NFL.

Starting next season, if a team wins the coin toss and then kicks a field goal, the other team gets the ball. If the game becomes tied again after that next series, play will continue under the current sudden-death rules.

Should the team winning the toss immediately score a touchdown, then the game is over.

There are nuances.

A safety would end the game immediately, because the team that got the ball first had a chance to score and failed. On a safety, they'd have to kick the ball away, meaning there is no way they could win the game. Seems kind of dumb if you don't think about it, but when you actually use your brain and think it over, it makes perfect sense.

If a team recovers an onside kick on the opening kickoff of overtime, then advances the ball and kicks a field goal, the game is over. This seems a bit fishier, but the receiving team had a chance to get the ball and failed. The same result (game over) happens if a team takes the opening kickoff of overtime, goes down the field, kicks a field goal, and then successfully executes an onside kick.

You can imagine the possibilities from a strategic standpoint. Of course, most NFL coaches will look at these rules, decide that nothing is worth the risk, and just kick the ball away, hoping for a defensive stop at some point.

However, there is a minority of coaches in the league, including Payton, who have shown the willingness to take risks with their play-calling. For those coaches, this seems to be a great opportunity to think outside the box and develop different strategies for overtime, rather than just "hope and prayer" for the coin toss.

Instead of embracing that opportunity, Payton decided to bitch about the changes. Yes, it sucks that the owners stuck the coaches in a golf tournament and then ran into a room to vote on the rule without anyone knowing about it first. But that's their right. The coaches didn't get a vote, anyway, and since they knew the vote was coming (scheduled for the next day), they should have made their thoughts known to their bosses ahead of time.

If this was done, they have nothing to complain about. Owners made their minds up, voted as they saw fit, and enacted a rule that makes some degree of sense. Next step is doing it for the regular season, something all sides should be in favor of. After all, if you're going to open up a bunch of strategic possibilities, it makes sense to let coaches try ideas out in regular season games, rather than having them use playoff games as the guinea pig on the rule.

These coaches make millions of dollars per season. Some of them make upwards of $7 million, or as much (if not more) than the most important players on their team. No one is begrudging them, as they work absolutely insane hours and drive themselves batty with film study and game-planning. However, the whining after being told they may have to think more during games is a little silly.

We're not re-inventing the wheel here. We're trying to figure out a better way to decide football games, rather than the "Get three first downs and kick a field goal" way of the past.

The Real Packers-Cardinals Controversy

NFL officiating czar Mike Periera appeared on NFL Network Tuesday night. It's a weekly bit they do where Periera addresses some of the weekend's more controversial calls.

He spent time Tuesday talking about the final play of the Packers-Cardinals game from Sunday. On that play, there was some crowing that quarterback Aaron Rodgers got hit in the facemask by defensive back Michael Allen, who jarred the ball free for Karlos Dansby to recover and take to the house for the game-winning score.

Reality is that the officials called the play correctly. The contact with Rodgers' facemask was incidental, and it had no impact on his ability to secure the ball. It was coming out no matter where Allen's hand ended up.

The Packers -- to their credit -- handled it well, blaming themselves for, you know, sucking on defense and not showing up on offense until the second quarter.

Fans are fans. No surprise they didn't take it well.

What's surprising about this whole thing is that Periera ignored two more obvious calls in that game.

Cardinals receiver Larry Fitzgerald was clearly guilty of pass interference on his second score, one where he went out of his way to run over Packers cornerback Charles Woodson.

Even more egregious was the non-call that came just two plays before Rodgers' fumble. Take a look.



Apparently, referee Scott Green was too busy doing something else, and he missed what has been the referee's primary responsibility all season: protect the quarterback.

Why did Pereira choose to ignore this bad call?

Who knows? Maybe he's got short-timer syndrome, as he's retiring. Perhaps he is tired of admitting on live national television that his guys screwed up a huge call.

Either way, had the Packers played half as well in the first half as they did in the second, it would never have come down to these calls. For once, I fully agree with the attitude of Mike McCarthy on the issue. He knows that talking about officiating sends a message that you're making excuses.

In my view, there's nothing wrong with addressing these controversial calls, but you have to recognize that they happen, they suck, and they usually even out over the course of a four-month season.

More Heartbreak

Whether it's the Moon Over Lambeau, 4th and 26, or the dumbest interception of Brett Favre's life, we sure can't seem to get these playoff games right anymore.

Now, enter The Fumble.

Ugh.

The NFL Could Be Making A Mistake

Earlier this week, you probably read my thoughts on the decision Sunday by the Indianapolis Colts.

While I still think it was a stupid thing for the Colts to do, the NFL might be on the verge of trumping their stupidity.

It seems common sense that there will be teams who don't take Week 17 games seriously. It's happened for many years, and it's hard to think anyone would want to stop it. While the integrity of the sport is extremely important, so is common sense.

If you're, say, the Green Bay Packers, who have clinched a spot in the NFC's postseason tournament, why on Earth would you play starters deep into a game against Arizona that means nothing? The best Green Bay can hope for is the fifth seed in the NFC, which nets them a path to the Super Bowl that consists of road games. Same deal for the sixth seed. There is no tangible benefit, outside of the very slight chance to host the NFC Championship should the fifth and sixth seeds advance through.

This makes sense, right?

Then why would the NFL's Competition Committee look at somehow forcing teams to play healthy starters?

"This is an issue that we have reviewed in the past. The position of the competition committee, and affirmed by the clubs, when it was reviewed in 2005 was that 'a team that has clinched its division title has earned the right to rest its starters for the postseason, and that preparing for the postseason is just as important as protecting some other team's playoff opportunity.' That is the current policy," league spokesman Greg Aiello said.

"We are aware of the fan reaction and that is a factor to be considered," he continued. "Some teams that have everything clinched, like the Giants and Patriots two years ago, choose to play all out to continue or gain momentum for the playoffs. We expect to continue to review this issue."

I'll save you the trouble.

Let teams do what they want.

I stand by my comments on the Colts. They threw a winnable game, and a chance to make history, so their starters could get some much-needed rest. The bottom line is that they decided the starters needed to come out of the Jets game in order for the Colts to stay on track for a Super Bowl title, even though they've lost in the divisional playoffs the last three times they procured a first-round bye and proceeded to half-ass one or more regular-season games.

It's just not something the league should intervene on.

If you don't want to be stuck relying on the Colts to beat someone to help you make the playoffs, win more games. It's not the Colts' problem.

In 2003, Vikings fans screamed bloody murder when the Broncos chose to half-ass a Week 17 game with Green Bay. We all know how that ended up for Minnesota, who needed to win because the Packers had won easily.



That's still an all-time classic.

Anyway, you should have heard Vikings fans on my radio show the next day. You would have thought Brett Favre and Mike Sherman had paid the Broncos off.

This wasn't a shot at the integrity of the game, nor was it a grand injustice against a team that started the season 6-0 and still managed to miss the playoffs.

The bottom line was that Denver earned the chance to rest starters before a road wild card game the next week. They did that by winning enough games to make the playoffs. The Packers have earned that right this week, and they should feel no obligation toward the Vikings, Dallas Cowboys, or anyone else on the planet. If they feel the need to bench Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Grant, or anyone else for any portion of the game -- or the whole damn thing -- it's fine.

And that's the way it should be.

Now, if you already have a first-round bye, it's pretty stupid to be sitting guys in Week 16. It locks that you're going to sit them in Week 17, and then they have a week off. Do you really want them screwing around for three weeks before a win-or-go-home divisional playoff game against a foe who won the week before and doesn't have any rust to shake off?

But, again, that's not the NFL's decision to make.

You can't legislate stupidity. That said, you can legislate stupidly. That's where the NFL might be going here. They need to tread carefully.

Why the Colts Are Wrong

Week 17 is usually a crapshoot in the NFL, kind of like how Week 1 is. We never know for sure how good teams are going to be, so there are many uncertainties in season openers.

Equal to that -- for different reasons -- is Week 17. The end of the season brings a lot of different approaches. Some teams go all out, trying to end the season on a winning note. Others play like they just can't wait to clean out their lockers and move on to the next year.

For other teams, Week 16 is the time to start playing out the string. Among those would be the Indianapolis Colts.

At 14-0, Colts management -- led by team grand poobah Bill Polian and rookie head coach Jim Caldwell (in the photograph) -- faced a dilemma. Go for the unbeaten season, maintain a rhythm for all your starters, or sit the important players, assuring their health for the playoffs?

By now, you know what the Colts did. They took quarterback and MVP favorite Peyton Manning out of Sunday's game with the Jets, leaving a 15-10 game in the hands of rookie Curtis Painter. The bug-eyed youngster quickly turned 15-10 into 29-15, and the Colts had their first loss.

Meanwhile, teams like Green Bay have a decision to make this week. The Packers can't improve their playoff position, no matter what they do. They're a wild card team, they're going on the road for the first round, and it's likely they'll have to win three road games to get to the Super Bowl.

Sunday's Week 17 game is meaningless. What should they do?

For the Packers, it should be obvious. You do what the Colts did. Guys like Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Grant, Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, Jermichael Finley, Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher, and Charles Woodson start, play a few series, then depart for a cozy seat on the bench.

Why is this so obvious, while what the Colts did was so obviously wrong?

To start, recent history works against the top seeds. Last year, only Pittsburgh, San Diego, and Arizona won home playoff games. AFC top seed Tennessee and the NFC's top seeded Giants both were one and done, losing to their respective conference's sixth-seeded teams, both of whom had upset division champions on the road the previous week.

Furthermore, the Colts have done this dance before, only to be met by an epic fail in the playoffs. The last two times Indianapolis secured a first-round bye, they were ousted in the divisional round by a road underdog. In fact, Peyton Manning is now 0-3 in his career in the divisional round after a first-round bye.

In all three situations, the Colts half-assed their season finale and lost.

This time around, the Colts decided not to wait for their season finale. They half-assed the 15th game, will almost assuredly do it again Sunday in Buffalo, and could go into the playoffs on a two-game losing streak.

Why?

There have been 43 Super Bowl winners. Many of them have been non-descript, except within their own franchises. Once the list hits 50 in a few years, it will become more and more watered down with forgettable figures.

The 1972 Dolphins are unforgettable. The 2009 Colts no longer have an opportunity to be unforgettable.

Yes, the objective to win the Super Bowl is a noble one. Everyone wants to do it. But given the way the playoffs have unfolded over the last few years (No. 1 seeds have not battled in a Super Bowl since New England-Philadelphia in 2004), don't you owe it to your fans to have a little momentum heading into the tournament?

Speaking of the fans, how mad are you today if you're a Colts season-ticket holder? It's bad enough to think that your team basically threw a game in front of you, but how about the fact that they're throwing your money away?

Let's say a good season ticket for Lucas Oil Stadium costs $750 (arbitrary figure, I know). Two of them (since you're not sitting alone) will run $1500. You're buying tickets for two games (preseason) that don't count and won't be taken seriously by anyone. Now, a third game has been thrown away by your team, since they are afraid of getting any good players hurt.

That means that 30 percent of your season ticket money will have gone to tickets for games that the home team isn't trying to win.

Doesn't that make you question your investment a bit? I mean, if they're not trying to win, what the hell are you doing spending so much money on the game? What fun could it possibly be to watch the home team go through the motions, especially against a team desperate to win?

As much as you have to respect the Colts for what they've accomplished, it's easy to see why people respect the Patriot way more. With an unbeaten season in their sights, New England played their 2007 season finale like it was the most important game of the year, even though home field had been clinched for weeks.

Guess what? No one was seriously injured, everyone was entertained, and the Patriots won.

It's too bad, for the sake of everyone who likes football, that Indianapolis didn't treat history with the same reverence. Maybe they could have finished the job that New England didn't.

NFL Quick Hits

With apologies to the great Peter King, here are some quick-hit thoughts on the NFL as we hit the end of Week 14 Monday night.

The Eagles are dangerous. Between athletes like DeSean Jackson, LeSean McCoy, and, yes, Michael Vick, Andy Reid has more toys on offense than he's ever had before. Even if Brian Westbrook doesn't come back this season, and if Jeremy Maclin's foot injury is worse than they fear, Donovan McNabb has a lot to work with heading into the playoffs.

Now, we just have to wait and see if Philadelphia can play better defense than they did Sunday night, when Eli Manning carved them up pretty good. When January rolls around -- and it's coming quicker than you may think -- they have to find a way to stop people. Having Asante Samuel and Sheldon Brown on the outside helps.

Oh, and Reid's whatever-that-was with Jackson Sunday night was hilarious. He's clearly having fun with this team, and even for a straight-laced coach, that's half the battle.

The Packers might be. It's hard to tell -- even after 14 games -- who the Green Bay Packers are. The adjustment to a 3-4 scheme seems to have benefited the defense, which continues to make plays and slow offenses down.

However, the Packers haven't faced a top offense in some time, and they got decimated by Brett Favre when that happened.

Is what you're seeing now a product of the players making the necessary adjustments and understanding the new defense, or is it simply a decent defense going up against crappy offenses?

As it stands, the Packers are staring down the barrell of McNabb or Kurt Warner in the first round. If they're lucky enough to win that game on the road, here comes Favre or Drew Brees in the divisional round.

In short, anyone who thinks this is a darkhorse Super Bowl contender is delusional.

If you're the Vikings, who do you want to avoid? Assuming the Vikings hold on for a first-round bye, which isn't a guarantee, they are not likely to enjoy the divisional round. The potential opponents include Philadelphia (knocked them out last year and they're better this year), Arizona (already thumped the Vikings once), and Green Bay (division rival, emotional feud).

The Packers might be the most desirable opponent. The Vikings won both games handily, with neither game's final score being at all indicative of how the game was played.

The Vikings will likely have to beat the Saints in New Orleans to get to the Super Bowl. That said, the divisional round will be no picnic, unless the Vikings get really lucky and get to play the Cowboys or Giants, neither of whom will do much to stay competitive against Minnesota.

No matter how tough their road may become, the Vikings are playing like a favorite in every way. They've exhibited offensive balance, they have great pass protection, they are rarely out-physicaled (yes, I know that's not a word), and they can do it all on defense.

To beat them, you need them off their game, or you have to beat them at their best. Regardless of what you think of Brad Childress, it's hard to imagine a veteran team like this being off their game in the playoffs.

No, 16-0 isn't more important than a title. That's just ridiculous talk. However, teams need to look at the past history. As King noted in MMQB this week, the top two AFC seeds are just 3-5 in divisional games the last four years. Last season, neither team in the NFC to earn a first-round bye won in the divisional round. Not only that, but the Cardinals -- twice -- were the only NFC team to win a home playoff game last year.

No, you can't blame this fact solely on teams resting starters when they already have a bye wrapped up. Every time a top team suffers an injury in Week 17, as Ben Roethlisberger did last year, the question of "Why is he even in the game?" comes up. That kind of media and fan pressure makes it tough for coaches to do the right thing.

Healthy players need to play. You can't simulate game speed in practice, no matter what you do. Plus, imagine the outcry if you actually simulated game speed in practice, only to have a top player suffer an injury.

This is football. Guys get hit, and sometimes they get hurt. However, athletes are extremely regimented. Taking them off their normal routine for a bye week is hard enough. Adding to that the potential of one or two more bye weeks is only going to make it more difficult for those players to get back in rhythm when the games resume.

Especially when those games count more than any other.

The pressure of winning home playoff games is bad enough, without players being asked to get back in game shape on the spot.

EOM

I'm with ya, Corey.

Hopefully, that's not the last time you'll put on that uniform. Unfortunately, the realities of the Packers' depth and free agency tell me it will be. Stinks.

I don't have much to say, really. That sucked. The Packers lost, and I am left almost completely speechless, except for the words "screen pass" and a few cuss words after them.

I'm going to be a big boy. I'm not going to blame the coaches for not having a sound plan. They're the ones who got this team where it got and helped turn this thing around so quickly. Sure, hindsight 20/20, but they saw things on film they thought they could exploit a certain way. It didn't work out.

Player execution wasn't flawless, and the Giants were very good on both sides of the ball.

When the chips were down, Brett was too cold, the kicking game was inexplicably bad (you could never convince me that Crosby came from Colorado and Ryan from the CFL with how bad the kickoffs and punts were Sunday), and they faced a team that executed better in all phases.

Congratulations, New York. Now win next Sunday. Please. I know you won't, but please do.

If you're sick of the Packers, it will probably help you to know that they're done. About the only thing worth posting about is if the unexpected happens and Brett hangs it up.

On a side note, I am in Lowell, Massachusetts, for hockey this weekend. Picked up Will Leitch's new book, "God Save The Fan". Read about 100 pages on the flight in to Boston. I'm going to try to tackle the rest of it while I'm out here. It's a fascinating book, and I highly recommend it - well, unless it goes down the tubes in the remaining 200 pages.

TELL ME I WAS DREAMING

Nope?


Dammit. More when I can think rationally.

NFL FOOTBALL '07: CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS

Yes, I was tempted to pick the Giants last week. Had I been picking with point spreads and not straight-up, I probably would have pulled the trigger.

Them's the breaks.

I mean no disrespect to the Giants, but it sure looked like the Cowboys spent too much time enjoying their 13-3 season and not enough time trying to get better and get ready for the divisional round.

I'm fine with that. I don't like the Cowboys, and I don't mind the Packers getting to play at home.

In the AFC, more arguments were made against resting players for regular-season games when you already have a bye week. Don't worry. It won't stop teams from doing it in the future.

It's simply our job to keep that stuff in mind when we're picking games. Feel free to remind me of this in the future.

New York Giants at Green Bay
The Giants deserve to be here, but let's deal with some facts (and opinions that can be taken as fact), here.

• The Giants were outgained by ~100 yards in the game against Dallas.
  
• In the first round, the Giants beat a mediocre Tampa Bay team that basically threw their last two regular-season games. New York was sharper because they had just gone toe-to-toe with New England.
• Green Bay played better (especially the last 56 minutes of the game) last week against Seattle than the Giants are probably capable of playing. It doesn't mean the Giants are toast in this game, because there's no guarantee the Packers will play that well again. But it's not a good sign, especially if you're thinking of taking the points.
• Eli Manning has talked about not liking the cold weather. Forecast gametime temperature: -2. Fahrenheit.
• The Giants secondary is decimated. The Packers, as long as there isn't a freak blizzard, will not be afraid to line up with five wideouts and exploit this.
• Green Bay's defense has more balance than Dallas or Tampa Bay.

The big one is this: The Giants don't win that game without a slew of mistakes by Dallas.

Yes, you have to give the Giants credit for competing and staying in the game long enough for Dallas to blow it, but can we count on Green Bay doing the same thing? The Packers already learned their lesson, when they coughed up a shot at home field in that horrible loss at Chicago. They won't screw this up again.

Green Bay is more talented, and they're at home. Take the Packers.
The pick: Green Bay

San Diego at New England
No way I figured Norv Turner's staff would out-coach Tony Dungy's last week. The Chargers adjusted and did the right things in the second half to at least keep Peyton Manning's offense from getting the ball into the end zone. And inexplicably, the Colts never really tried to establish the run in the second half.

This worries me more than anything else entering this week. While Indianapolis wasn't smart enough to really even try to expose an apparent hole in San Diego's defense (presumably because it didn't fit their game plan), we all know New England won't make the same mistake. If the Chargers' run defense can be exposed, the Patriots will expose it.

New England's coaches are prepared for everything. They'll adjust on the fly better than anyone.

And Norv Turner is on the other sideline.

Really, can you pick the Chargers to win this game? Why? What has Norv Turner done to make you think he can out-coach Bill Belichick in a close game? And what have the Chargers done to make you think they can win comfortably?

If it's Turner versus Belichick in the fourth quarter of a nail-biter, Belichick wins.

If the Chargers win by double-digits and aren't seriously threatened in the fourth quarter, I'd be beyond stunned.

New England has Tom Brady. They have great players all over the field on offense. The Chargers aren't good enough to stop them, especially if Billy Volek's presence limits San Diego offensively. Even with a healthy and effective Philip Rivers, I probably couldn't pull the trigger on this one.

The odds of San Diego covering the 14-point spread are very high. The odds of them winning outright are virtually nil. But I guess that's why they play the games. Good luck, guys. you'll need it.
The pick: New England

RANDOMIZATION: 01/16/08

Disallowed goal revisited. I have received many a response via e-mail and otherwise to my post about the WCHA and their Friday controversy in Denver. I want to thank all those with whom I have corresponded, whether we agree about what has happened or not.

I have a couple of things I'd like to add to what I said before.

First off, someone brought up a valid point. While referee Randy Schmidt is ultimately to blame for much of what went wrong, there were two other officials working on the ice with him, along with a replay official. They have to share some of the blame, too, because they had a responsibility to communicate what they saw with Schmidt and didn't do that.

Secondly, WCHA commissioner Bruce McLeod has broken his "silence" on this topic, speaking to - among others - Todd Milewski of The Capital Times in Madison.

(The commish gets a bit of a pass for his previous silence on the matter, as he was in Nashville for important NCAA-related stuff.)

He said he looked into the possibility that there was a clock malfunction, and he said that Denver senior associate athletic director Ron Grahame did find a glitch in the TV system that adds 0.0 between 1.0 and 0.9.

That, however, wasn't the issue to the commissioner.

"The issue was simply in the instructions that Randy (Schmidt, the referee) gave to the operator of the replay equipment: run it down to zero and stop it," McLeod said. "And, to me, that was the wrong instruction. He should have gone further back. And he would have seen because what he saw definitely was that the puck was not in the net, but what he didn't see was the puck had crossed the line and come out. It was a human error."

I trust the commissioner when he says it was a human error. I also recognize that it was more than just one guy who messed up, though Schmidt bears the ultimate responsibility (and reading between the lines, it sounds like he is going to be pretty heavily disciplined or fired).

The WCHA has a bit of work to do to restore their reputation, and I'm sure that the officials will reminded of all the protocol for review situations. None of this will get Wisconsin their point back, but there's no fair way to do that. McLeod is right. Giving Wisconsin a point will cause St. Cloud State to look at what happened to them, as they were on the wrong side of Schmidt's other unfortunate mistake this season.

Schmidt has seen his share of controversy already this season, and the latest one might not be over yet.

I've been told by a reliable source that McLeod is planning on being in Duluth for at least one game of the UMD-Minnesota series this weekend. If I get a chance to sit down with him, I'll let you know about what is said.

How to win a road NFL game this weekend. For the Chargers and Giants, I have one tip that is more important than anything else.

Take the tape of your Week Two game (San Diego and the Giants were both bludgeoned by their title game opponents in Week Two) and set it on fire. Make it a public ceremony.

Don't watch it. And whatever you do, don't take anything that happened and act like you can learn from it for this week.

Both San Diego and New York are better than they were in Week Two, and that's a good start. But it's also worth noting that Green Bay and New England aren't the same, either. The Patriots aren't going to carbon-copy their Week Two game plan, because that's just not how Bill Belichick operates. They'll come up with some different wrinkles on each side of the ball, so if the Chargers are insistent on learning lessons from that 38-14 defeat, they're probably wasting their time. Outside of playing pure fundamental football (which they didn't play in the earlier meeting), there's nothing San Diego can learn to do.

The Giants lost 35-13 to Green Bay in Week Two. Back then, the Packers didn't even muster the threat of a running game, and Brett Favre was not good throwing the ball deep. The pass defense was shaky because of poor play at safety, and the Pack didn't look like a Super Bowl contender.

If New York shows up prepared to play the same Green Bay team they played in September, they'll get worked by as many (if not more) points.

RANDOMIZATION: 01/10/08

Favre returning. Maybe.

"I am trying to enjoy [the hot streak the Packers are on] because this could be my last game in Green Bay. For the first time in three years, I haven't thought this could be my last game. I would like to continue longer."

It's better than being completely indecisive on the topic, I suppose.

But the "this could be my last game in Green Bay" part confuses me, especially when you put it in the same paragraph as "I would like to continue longer".

Brett, if you'd like to keep playing, no one in Green Bay is going to stop you from doing it.

Not even Aaron Rodgers.

(Though this brings up a topic that not many people have discussed today. Why not trade Aaron Rodgers to a team in need of a quarterback? The guy had a rock-solid preseason, and he was nothing short of superb when Favre was injured against Dallas. Sure, it's a risk, because Rodgers is starting to look like a guy who would be really good in this offense. But if you can help out at a different position [not a lock, mind you], why wouldn't you consider it?)

Now go finish getting ready for the playoff game Saturday. It's time to get back to the NFC Championship Game.

Divisional Playoff Weekend. This brings us to football picks for this weekend. Since the Packer game is first on the schedule, we'll start there.

Seattle at Green Bay. The Packers are a rather solid favorite in this game, but should they be such an overwhelming pick? Seattle is going to pose problems for the Packers' offensive line, which doesn't allow sacks in large part because the offense is designed to prevent them with quick, rhythmic passing. However, the Seahawks are solid enough in the secondary that their pass rush, led by Patrick Kerney, will have an impact on this game.

In a "normal" Green Bay season (normal as defined by "since Mike Holmgren got there"), the Packers would simply counter this with screen passes meant to attack Seattle's rather average linebackers (exception: Julian Peterson) and keep the defensive line from overpursuing. This is not a normal Packer team. They're not particularly good at screen passes, and it probably doesn't bode well for that part of this game. To keep the defensive line from being all over Favre, Ryan Grant needs to have a big day running the ball. I expect to see a lot of Favre in the shotgun, and I wouldn't be shocked to see a few draw plays run out of the shotgun spread, all in the name of keeping the defense honest.

In the end, Seattle's poor running game will hurt them, and Green Bay will do enough to Matt Hasselbeck to keep Seattle at bay.
The pick: Green Bay

Jacksonville at New England. ESPN.com's Jeremy Green thinks Jacksonville is going to win.

I think he's nuts.

Listen, the Jaguars have that cute two-headed running game with Fred Taylor and Maurice Jones-Drew. They have a quarterback who doesn't screw up much. They don't shoot themselves in the foot with dumb penalties. The weather - if it's crappy - won't bother them, as they've already won twice in Pittsburgh, including a snow game and a night game.

But who's going to cover Randy Moss? Wes Welker? Donte Stallworth? Ben Watson?

Who's going to deal with Kevin Faulk out of the backfield? Or Laurence Maroney?

If the Jaguars can't get heat with their front four, who's going to hit Tom Brady? They're going to be too busy using linebackers and extra defensive backs to cover up the holes in their coverage.

Too many flaws in the Jaguars' game. IF they can run the ball consistently, take care of the ball better than they did in Pittsburgh last week, and get a few breaks, they have a shot. But it's too much to ask.
The pick: New England

San Diego at Indianapolis: Toughest call of the weekend. The Chargers have a shot, but much of their shot depends on the health of TE Antonio Gates, who was injured in the Wild Card win over Tennessee. If Gates can't go, the Chargers have to lean too much on the wide receivers and Philip Rivers for my taste. Rivers is much better when he has his big target in Gates. Otherwise, the primary receivers (Vincent Jackson and Chris Chambers) are too inconsistent. They're going to have to be great Sunday, because you know the Colts will do all they can to take away LaDainian Tomlinson.

Indianapolis figures to have Marvin Harrison back, and that should help Peyton Manning a great deal, considering he will feel the heat all afternoon from the Chargers defense.

I think the Chargers have a shot. I'd like them even more if they had Antonio Gates, or if they didn't have to travel all the way across the country to play this game (their record this year jumping multiple time zones isn't great). But Tomlinson is eager to rebound off a rough game against Tennessee, and Rivers was sure comfortable throwing that deep ball last week. That dimension may be enough to counter the (potential) loss of Gates. And if Gates plays, I'm much more confident about this.
The pick: San Diego

N.Y. Giants at Dallas. Maybe the Giants have a real shot here, but this is still Eli Manning. And he's on the road. I just don't trust him much.

No Jessica Simpson at this game probably means Tony Romo will play well, though she was nowhere to be found in Week 17, and Romo was pure garbage in that game.

Dallas rebounds from that Washington loss by beating the Giants at home, and they prepare to lose to Green Bay next Sunday. I called that now, probably because I'm stupid.
The pick: Dallas

RANDOMIZATION: 01/09/08

What did we miss? The two-week hiatus (was planned to be one, but you know how that goes) allowed us to miss a bunch of stuff here. The NFL playoffs started after New England finished a 16-0 regular season. The NHL played a hockey game outside, allowing cynical media members to get a bunch more ammunition to make fun of the league. The Timberwolves lost a bunch of games. Then they won one.

Oh, and a national television commentator suggested that a bunch of golfers lynch Tiger Woods. We'll start there.

Context matters. I don't know much about Kelly Tilghman. She seems like a rather nice-looking young lady, and she did quickly apologize for her stupid statement.

However, weren't we down this road in April? And didn't everyone scream that Don Imus needed to get fired?

Think about that. In one corner, you have a guy who is paid to try to be funny. He was also being paid to push the envelope and be controversial. In the other, you have a woman who is paid to do play-by-play, and is probably not being asked to push anything or be even remotely controversial.

So why didn't anyone cry that Tilghman should be fired?

Please note: I am not advocating that she lose her job. I thought it was a travesty when Imus got fired, and I would have thought the same had The Golf Channel dropped the hammer on Tilghman. But why is she skating, while Imus was raked over the coals?

(Credit here to Tiger Woods, too. Woods quickly has tried to remove himself from the controversy. Moving on is the best thing to do here. Now that I've made my dumb statements on this, we'll do exactly that.)

NFL playoff quick hits. The Packers don't have a layup on Saturday, but should win. Jacksonville's physicality will only matter if David Garrard is sharper than he was in Pittsburgh last week. Oh, and they're playing the Patriots, so not much will matter if the Patriots are as ready to play as I expect them to be. This isn't the week to look for an upset of that juggernaut. The Colts need a healthy Marvin Harrison to win, but the Chargers may need Antonio Gates more. Too bad Jessica Simpson won't be on hand in Dallas Sunday, as her squeeze is likely to fare better against that beaten-up Giants secondary than Jeff Garcia did. That's fine. Maybe we can arrange for her appearance in some sort of skimpy, Dukes of Hazzard-esque item at the NFC Championship Game.